Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 12, 2013 6:48:33 GMT -5

OK, I really didn't like where the show seemed to be going after the first season. I quacking hated Ziggy, and the union stuff was boring/oddly misplaced at first.

Then things kicked into gear and HOLY Quack was this season good. I couldn't stop watching it. I had to know what happened to Frank, Ziggy and Nick, three characters I didn't give a shiz about at the start.

It made sense that D would die this season. I didn't find his death scene that shocking or anything. BUT I do think is was a stretch to believe that Stringer would have connections to do that without Avon knowing. I don't know. It's like why is he number two if he has these outside connections to stronger groups in NYC?

Last Edit:Feb 12, 2013 6:51:09 GMT -5 by superfurryanimal - Back to Top

Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 12, 2013 7:19:41 GMT -5

LOL I really wish that rat fuck in the FBI gets made and fucked up. I know it's not gonna happen. Bhaaaa. I just fell really bad for Frank. He was trying to do the right thing but it was all shit before he even started making bad deals.

Post by A$AP Rosko on Feb 12, 2013 7:28:48 GMT -5

And Matt, I think Stringer always had designs on being the head honcho and not just the #2 guy forever. But having connections with a group in NYC in no way gives him the means to rise to the top in Baltimore. I don't see what you found implausible about that.

And I don't think D's death was supposed to be shocking, just tragic. D'Angelo's storyline is the stuff of great tragedy. LOOOOOOOVE that scene where D breaks down The Great Gatsby with deadly literary accuracy at the reading group. "It's like you can change up right, you can say you somebody new, you can even give yourself a whole new story. But what came first is who you really are, and what happened first is what really happened. It don't matter that some fool say he different, 'cause what really make you different is what you really do or what you really go through. It's like all them books up in his library. Gatsby frontin' with all them books...but you pull 'em down off the shelf, none of the pages ever been opened. He got all them books he ain't read damn near one of 'em. Gatsby, he was who he was and he did what he did, and 'cause he wasn't ready to get real with the story...that sh*t caught up to him. I mean, I think, anyway."

I love the labor union stuff and I think it fits snugly within the political/ideological universe of The Wire, but I was/am a bigger fan of Season 2 than most people (I'd put it just a hair above season 3). I think that ultimately, the labor union stuff shows that the same things that are inherently and systematically problematic in the projects of Baltimore are just as present in Baltimore's other institutions as well.

In other words, I think the dock stuff and the labor union stuff takes The Wire's central thesis a step further; instead of just claiming that American institutions are set up in such a way that make it impossible for the urban poor to thrive in America, Simon is claiming that institutions IN GENERAL eventually overcome and destroy better-minded individuals. Frank Sobotka is a man who was always trying to do the right thing, and was always fighting against the bureaucracy of the political zeitgeist. Sobotka was in the right, but he had to do "wrong" (i.e. "cheat the system") to continue doing right. It's that kind of complexity and that kind of individual vs. institution dynamic that makes The Wire such a great and such a novelistic television show.

Post by A$AP Rosko on Feb 12, 2013 7:34:21 GMT -5

Unfortunately that ain't how this show works, man. This show is deeply pessimistic in its outlook on the power of the individual to change systemic corruption. That said, I think there is also some optimism to be found there between the cracks; ultimately, this is a show that believes in the individual's propensity to do good over the ability of systems to do so. It's humanistic in that sense. And, still, every good-minded person in this show comes up short in changing their environment. The corrupt systems are in place, and I think David Simon believes deep down that there is no changing them at this point (and by "I think he believes this" I mean "I heard him say he believes this in a lecture last year").

Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 12, 2013 7:34:49 GMT -5

And Matt, I think Stringer always had designs on being the head honcho and not just the #2 guy forever. But having connections with a group in NYC in no way gives him the means to rise to the top in Baltimore. I don't see what you found implausible about that.

And I don't think D's death was supposed to be shocking, just tragic. D'Angelo's storyline is the stuff of great tragedy. LOOOOOOOVE that scene where D breaks down The Great Gatsby with deadly literary accuracy at the reading group. "It's like you can change up right, you can say you somebody new, you can even give yourself a whole new story. But what came first is who you really are, and what happened first is what really happened. It don't matter that some fool say he different, 'cause what really make you different is what you really do or what you really go through. It's like all them books up in his library. Gatsby frontin' with all them books...but you pull 'em down off the shelf, none of the pages ever been opened. He got all them books he ain't read damn near one of 'em. Gatsby, he was who he was and he did what he did, and 'cause he wasn't ready to get real with the story...that sh*t caught up to him. I mean, I think, anyway."

I love the labor union stuff and I think it fits snuggly within the political/ideological universe of The Wire, but I was/am a bigger fan of Season 2 than most people (I'd put it just a hair above season 3). I think that ultimately, the labor union stuff shows that the same things that are inherently and systematically problematic in the projects of Baltimore are just present in Baltimore's other institutions as well.

In other words, I think the dock stuff and the labor union stuff takes The Wire's central thesis a step further; instead of just claiming that American institutions are set up in such a way that make it impossible for the urban poor to thrive in America, Simon is claiming that institutions IN GENERAL eventually overcome and destroy better-minded individuals. Frank Sobotka is a man who was always trying to do the right thing, and was always fighting against the bureaucracy of the political zeitgeist. Sobotka was in the right, but he had to do "wrong" (i.e. "cheat the system") to continue doing right. It's that kind of complexity and that kind of individual vs. institution dynamic that makes The Wire such a great and such a novelistic television show.

Absolutely amazing breakdown, Kyle!! That's why I wanted to get this tread started. I was dieing to hear what people had to say. And yes, I totally get where the show was branching out to with the ports but it was just strange at first.

Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 12, 2013 7:37:29 GMT -5

Unfortunately that ain't how this show works, man. This show is deeply pessimistic in its outlook on the poewr of the individual to change corruption. That said, I think there is also some optimism to be found there beneath the cracks; ultimately, this is a show that believes in the power of people to do good over the power of systems. And, still, every good-minded person in this show comes up short in changing their environment. The corrupt systems are in place, and I think David Simon believes deep down that there is no changing them at this point (and by "I think he believes this" I mean "I heard him say he believes this in a lecture last year").

Absolutely, no chance of it and that is how the world is. And it should be shown this way. The show itself has plenty of other moments like this. When people are dicking around on the job and miss "case breaking" moments. It's genius. It makes the show better, even if it makes you quacking pissed the hell off.

Last Edit:Feb 12, 2013 7:41:19 GMT -5 by superfurryanimal - Back to Top

Post by Dave Maynar on Feb 12, 2013 7:59:41 GMT -5

I am really not surprised that you disliked Season Two at first. It is pretty common amongst people, it seems. For me, it had a lot to do with my preconceptions of the show. I had heard again and again about how the show was this great crime drama (possibly the best ever). The first season very much enforces what you expect. Dealing, wire taps, people getting shot. It's all there. Then, Season Two starts, and we're following around a union shop steward and his idiot son. I was really confused by the sudden change and had no idea about why I was watching a commentary on the decay of the American industrial complex and its resultant effect on the communities that were based off it. Sometime during the season, I had a breakthrough where I realized that the reason why The Wire is so great is that it really goes beyond crime to make a larger commentary about not only what crime is but how and why it pervades all spheres of society even those that are not directly affected by it.

Post by Flanz on Feb 12, 2013 8:47:54 GMT -5

FWIW, as much as I hated the 2nd season at the time, once you finish the series and get the full scope of David Simon's vision for the show, you gain a lot more respect for Season 2. Plus, you get introduced to The Greek and his crew, who are some of my favorite secondary characters on the show.

Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 12, 2013 10:36:48 GMT -5

FWIW, as much as I hated the 2nd season at the time, once you finish the series and get the full scope of David Simon's vision for the show, you gain a lot more respect for Season 2. Plus, you get introduced to The Greek and his crew, who are some of my favorite secondary characters on the show.

I meant to point out the irony of McNulty being sent to the ports at the end of Season one. As it highlights the institutional corruption that the show is so great at pointing out. BUT, as is turns out, they actually end up sending him right into another hotbed of criminal activity. Pretty great tie in, even if he isn't involved in the initial case work.

Post by Flanz on Feb 12, 2013 10:47:12 GMT -5

I meant to point out the irony of McNulty being sent to the ports at the end of Season one. As it highlights the institutional corruption that the show is so great at pointing out. BUT, as is turns out, they actually end up sending him right into another hotbed of criminal activity. Pretty great tie in, even if he isn't involved in the initial case work.

Yeah, that theme of social, political, etc. corruption is prevalent throughout the whole show, and basically just gains momentum as the show goes on.

I think Frank's speech when he realizes his dream for getting the docks long-term work is gone is one of the best in the show and summarizes the season in general very well. Season 2 was about the demise of American industry, how our society is better at finding a shortcut to quick-fix a solution than doing the difficult job of finding long-term stability and enterprise.

Post by A$AP Rosko on Feb 12, 2013 11:06:41 GMT -5

I meant to point out the irony of McNulty being sent to the ports at the end of Season one. As it highlights the institutional corruption that the show is so great at pointing out. BUT, as is turns out, they actually end up sending him right into another hotbed of criminal activity. Pretty great tie in, even if he isn't involved in the initial case work.

Yeah, that theme of social, political, etc. corruption is prevalent throughout the whole show, and basically just gains momentum as the show goes on.

I think Frank's speech when he realizes his dream for getting the docks long-term work is gone is one of the best in the show and summarizes the season in general very well. Season 2 was about the demise of American industry, how our society is better at finding a shortcut to quick-fix a solution than doing the difficult job of finding long-term stability and enterprise.

Additionally, season 2 is about how in the American political landscape, the needs and desires (and, by extension, the quality of life) of the American working class get compromised in satisfying the needs of those already in positions of power and wealth (thus, Sobotka's railing against Tricky Dick Nixon and Ronnie "The Unionbuster Reagan," which was awesome). Sobotka cheated the system not because he was greedy or selfish, but because that's what he needed to do to create a better life for his workers. Such is the state of things in our current political/sociological/economic landscape.

Post by superfurryanimal on Feb 13, 2013 19:41:37 GMT -5

Yeah, that theme of social, political, etc. corruption is prevalent throughout the whole show, and basically just gains momentum as the show goes on.

I think Frank's speech when he realizes his dream for getting the docks long-term work is gone is one of the best in the show and summarizes the season in general very well. Season 2 was about the demise of American industry, how our society is better at finding a shortcut to quick-fix a solution than doing the difficult job of finding long-term stability and enterprise.

Additionally, season 2 is about how in the American political landscape, the needs and desires (and, by extension, the quality of life) of the American working class get compromised in satisfying the needs of those already in positions of power and wealth (thus, Sobotka's railing against Tricky weenie Nixon and Ronnie "The Unionbuster Reagan," which was awesome). Sobotka cheated the system not because he was greedy or selfish, but because that's what he needed to do to create a better life for his workers. Such is the state of things in our current political/sociological/economic landscape.

This seems to be a recurring theme in many of HBO's best shows. I'm thinking of William Hearst's backhanded way of buying up claims on Deadwood, specifically the episode "Amalgamation and Capitol." And subplots in Season 4 and 6 of the Sopranos. I do think Sobotka's situation is much more tragic then that of the main characters in the other shows.

Post by postjack on Feb 13, 2013 22:11:45 GMT -5

Sobotka's death was the 2nd most emotionally crushing moment of the series for me. The 1st most crushing cannot be discussed in this thread. He was just such a good dude, just trying to get work for his people. So many of the other characters motives for crime (or crime fighting) have roots in greed and ego.

But having said that, even when we consider the characters whose motivations appear to be rooted primarily in greed and ego (I'm thinking of any given drug dealer, or any given cop, specifically McNulty), there are always deeper emotional and even existential factors behind that greed and ego. I'm thinking of McNulty trying to figure out who the hell he is, or hoppers trying to make sense of their existence in such hellish surroundings.

Superfurry, very excited for you to get into Season 3. I'm rewatching it right now and am almost finished.

Post by EAP on Feb 23, 2013 1:09:58 GMT -5

i finished season 2 this week.

i enjoyed it, b/c as soon as those girls were dead i was obviously enraged (yes, i know surprising you all) and i am glad that they killed that dummy.

frank's character i felt neutral about. i guess the worst part of this is that all these people have been in other stuff and i can't seem to get those other characters out of my mind lol. i didn't think frank was ever coming from a bad place. i think he saw his family/friends suffering and went into survival mode and as this show keeps revealing, you never know what people are going to do when they are in survival mode. but in the end, i have a problem with major law breaking behavior that ends up hurting other people (i.e. the NO NO WORD!!! which ultimately is the down-fall for seemingly everyone on this show and the dead girls).

wth on the ending, of course the greek would be protected but if he appears in further seasons it makes sense in the bigger scope of things.

my biggest complaint was the hood stuff felt kind of disjointed, like they threw it in episodes just to be able to focus on those characters in later seasons. i thought like maybe there could have been more of a flow between the two story lines. i dunno. maybe not something everyone feels.

also glad there was less mcnulty, still not a fan.

characters i did like:beadieomarkimalt danielsstringersergethe greekguy with glasses and bow tielester

characters i did not like:mcnultyfat white police guy who is grossbubblesziggythe greek's helper guyd'angelo (RIP even though you were whiney)avonlester's tiny furniture which was missing

i got season 3 disc 1 in the mail and started episode 1 last night. they played 50 cent like 3 minutes in, so....yeah. i dig it. lol

Post by Dave Maynar on Feb 25, 2013 6:55:57 GMT -5

I think Bubbles is a great example of a character where you have to experience his total story arc to have an appreciation for his character. You have to remember that she is only at the end of season 2 for the purposes of this thread. At this point, if I remember correctly, there's not a ton of depth to his character, so it's not surprising that he might get the thumbs down from her. If he is still getting the thumbs down at the end of his story arc, I will fight EAP.